Cited by 64Global Cancer Incidence and ScreeningHealth disparities and outcomesBreast Cancer Treatment Studies

Primary and secondary care management of women with early breast cancer from affluent and deprived areas: retrospective review of hospital and general practice records

Open access
Macleod, U.·2000·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether poorer survival of breast cancer among deprived women compared with affluent women is related to their NHS care. DESIGN: Retrospective review of hospital and general practice case records. SETTING: Greater Glasgow Health Board area. SUBJECTS: Women diagnosed with breast cancer in 1992-3 who lived in the most affluent (deprivation categories 1 and 2) and the most deprived areas (deprivation categories 6 and 7) of Glasgow (Carstairs and Morris deprivation index). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Breast cancer treatment, time from general practice consultation to clinic visit and surgery, and details of hospital admissions and follow up in primary and secondary care. RESULTS: The access to care and surgical and oncological treatment of women from affluent and deprived areas were similar. Admissions to hospital for problems not related to breast cancer were more common in those living in deprived areas (number admitted once or more: 51 (24%) v 13 (10%), P=0.001). Consultation patterns in general practice by the second year after diagnosis showed women in deprived areas consulting more frequently than women in affluent areas (median (interquartile range) number of consultations (5 (2-10) v 7 (4-13), P=0.01). CONCLUSION: Women living in affluent areas did not receive better NHS care for breast cancer than women in deprived areas. However, women from deprived areas seem to have greater comorbidity, and poorer outcomes from breast cancer among these women is probably due to factors which result in deprived communities having poorer health outcomes rather than to management of their breast cancer.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.320.7247.1442

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Services that are less permeable tend to have high levels of default by socio-economically disadvantaged people.

    “Services that are less permeable tend to have high levels of default by socio-economically disadvantaged people [50-53].”

    From Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups (2006) · cites this paper as [52]

    The Follow up section reports that women from deprived areas were more likely to miss breast-cancer clinic appointments (12% versus 4%) and suggests that ease of access to hospital may be a factor. It does not assess whether the service was ‘less permeable’ or establish a general tendency across services. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 22 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. BMJ VOLUME 320 27 MAY 2000 bmj.com on 9 October 2023 by guest. Protected by copyright. http://www.bmj.com/ BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.320.7247.1442 on 27 May 2000. Downloaded from

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Macleod, U.
Affiliations
University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
Macleod, U.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2000-05-27
Volume
320
Issue
7247
Pages
1442-1445
ISSN
0959-8138 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2049868820
Cited by
64
References
22
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Keywords
breast cancer, socioeconomic deprivation, health disparities, health care access, primary care, secondary care, hospitalization, general practitioner visits, Glasgow, comorbidities
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Breast Neoplasms, Family Practice, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Services Accessibility, Hospitalization, Humans, Middle Aged, Poverty, Retrospective Studies, Scotland, State Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review